Skip to main content

tv   National Journal Midterm Election Preview  CSPAN  October 5, 2014 5:30am-7:01am EDT

5:30 am
thank you all for coming out. i'm excited and looking forward to two of the most brightest people in town and people i've known between the two of them for close to 70 years because we go back 30-odd years and stan about 30 years. so these are folks that i have enjoyed being with and loved watching their work. they're just two great pros and people. if you go back to the early part of last year, there were
5:31 am
two competing scenarios, two sort of theories of what the 2014 mid term elections could be about. one theory was some of the challenges problems facing the republican party in 2012 would just sort of flow on into 2014. the other was that this would be a classic mid term election referendum on the incumbent president and with all that that entails. so two competing directions and it could have really gone either way. in terms of challenges facing the republican party some of them were with key voting groups, some of it was sort of their own, sort of some of the things they were doing just sort of a nutshell. the challenge of minority oters as we know that governor romney got 59% of the white vote and gosh nobody's ever gotten 59% of the white vote and lost a presidential election before and quite simply what was happening was
5:32 am
the country is changing so much that it's getting hard and the vote for congress was almost identical if you're losing the african american vote by 87 points and the latino vote by a 44 point margin, they sort of don't generate enough white voters i mean how well can you do in order to win if given the changing demographics of the country? and this wasn't a romney campaign thing because the vote for congress was virtually identical. so you look at that and say it's a big demographic challenge that the republican party is going to have to face. then you look at young voters.
5:33 am
i just turned 60 last year. i look at voters under 45, under 40. they're the future. and i look in the mirror and look at those of us roughly our age and jeff wherever he went, you know, we're like the predead. there was a problem of nominating exotic and problematic people for the u.s. senate who had the unique ability to seize defeat from
5:34 am
the jaws of victory. and not to name names or anything, but indiana, missouri, delaware, colorado, where am i missing? nevada. ust some interesting people. so these were real challenges facing the republican party and ones they had to worry about going into 2012. and then the other hand what are mid term elections about particularly second term mid term elections? it's a referendum on the president. and they're not always that way. occasionally there's an exception to the rule. 1998 bill clinton's second term mid term election turned out to be a backlash against impeachment and 2002 was 14 months after 9/11 so sort of the reverberations of 9/11 were still occurring.
5:35 am
but other than that, as my friend likes to point out, the party the white house has lost house seats in all but three elections since the civil war and that's kind otnoff a random pattern. and that so -- and i'm not going to go through any poll numbers because we've got two of the best pollsters in the business coming up. but to me, my view is that what we're seeing is the problems the challenges that face the republican party and kept them from picking up the three seats they needed at the time to get a majority in the senate. and to win the presidential race those challenges in 2012 they were real and they really hurt and they may be real and really hurt them in 2006. but in the context of this election they just seem somewhat smaller. they just don't seem to be the deal-breakers that they were in 2012 and possibly could be in 2016. while if you went back to a
5:36 am
year-and-a-half ago and thought what's the worst -- if you're a democrat what's the worst case sken air you you could have and that would be a president with really low approval numbers generally in the low to mid 40's with disapprovals in the low to mid 50s, with across-the-board lousy approval ratings on the economy, lousy approval ratings on handling foreign policy. i mean, you know, think of the nbc "wall street journal" poll that his firm is the republican half of that firm but -- on that poll. but overall it was 40 approved, 54 disapproved so you're minus 14 overall. he economy was 43 approved, 53 disapproved. but the real kicker was ensuring a strong national defense. 32 approved, 62 disapproved. wow, that's sort of kind of
5:37 am
earth-shattering. so you just look at that and say wow this -- i'm going to use a technical political science term here. this is a bummer environment for democrats. and so the problems are just as big as they thought. in terms of what happens, we have a room full of pros here. not much is going to happen in the house. democratic losses could be as few as two or three or four seats and as many as nine, 10, 12, something like that if republicans hit 13 that would be at the highest point they've been since the end of world war ii but that's kind of a bit above the range of most likely outcomes. but the real deal is the senate. in 300 words or less the way i look at it is the perfect storm of factors coming together. it's exposure, just the raw numbers. democrats have 21 seats up, republicans only have 15. that's the first factor and the least important.
5:38 am
the bigger one is the map, the geography of this election. it's just awful for democrats when you have 7 seats up, in states that romney carried and there's only one republican seat up in an obama state, that's susan collins in maine and she couldn't lose reelection if she tried. you have that. six of the seven republican seats that are up this time are democratic seats up in romney states won by 14 points or more. you show me a state where romney won by 14 points and i will show you a state that in 2014 i wouldn't want to be a democrat running for a federal office in that state. it just is what it is. third is turnout. and quite simply mid term election turnouts tend to be a lot better for republicans. i mean, the presidential year the turnout is big, it's broad, it's diverse, it looks like the country. mid term elections, the turnout is about 70% of what a
5:39 am
presidential turnout is. but not only is it smaller, it's older, whiter, more conservative, more republican. where it's a thumb on the scale. unless you have a situation like in 2006 where you had a very unpopular war in iraq and hurricane katrina, unless you have something like that going to tilt it back the other directs you're going to have a turnout dynamics that will favor to a certain extent republicans and the broader environment. so look at those and say, those are pretty big sort of atmospheric conditions that -- for democrats. so when i sort of do the math real quick -- and then i want .o get neil we'll see. when i do the math i'm putting it at about a 60% chance of republicans getting the majority. and i've been sort of there for 3 or 4 months and at one point i was higher than most people and now if you look at a lot of
5:40 am
the models i'm actually lower percentage than most of the computer models out there if you follow those things. but i put it at 06%. the way i sort of do -- 60%. there's sort of three gimme putts. seats that are clearly going republican. montana, south dakota, west virginia. so that's three. so theoretically, republicans are halfway to the six seats they need just with gimme putts. and then you get to the three other democratic seats up where romney carried by 14 points or more. mark begich in alaska, mark prior in arkansas, mary land rue in louisiana. now, each of these, these are really, really challenging difficult and i would say at least a little bit in each one uphill race force each one. could one of them survive? yeah, one of them could survive. sure. and but the thing about it is,
5:41 am
if -- this is the huge if. if republicans don't lose one e.g. r own seats, kansas. if they don't lose one of their own seats, all republicans have to do to win a majority, montana, south dakota, west virginia, louisiana, alaska, arkansas. hat's it it, game-set-match. but if one of these three survive, any one of them survives, then that means republicans have to pick up at least one purple swing state or light blue state that's up. or conversely if any of the republican vulnerable seats lose and mitch mcconnell was in a dead even race for a long time and now he's kind of picked up a little bit over alison grimes, i would not say pulling away and he is not safe. but you can see sort of a bit of daylight in between them. and it looks to be stable.
5:42 am
looks right now from my point to be stable. and georgia, michelle nun was ahead for a good while. it was close and now you've seen david perdue pull up. you can see daylight. seems reasonably stable. where i think you would have to give republicans the edge there. kansas is the one that i'm almost stopped speculating about because like the raise from oz. it's so weird. and in my business, you look at your experience -- and i've been doing this for 30 years. my news letter for 30 years. you look at this and say, ok, based on past experience when we've seen things kind of like this what's happened in the past? well, nothing's ever happened like this. it's sort of a unique, democrat drops out. the independent is running ahead of the incumbent, the
5:43 am
incumbent is well liked in the state but sort of has been mailing in for the last couple of years and won the primary and went home to take a nap. and -- home to alexandria and virginia. and so you just kind of wince and say, you know, this disaster could have been avoided here. -- and the t if funny thing the way kansas is and this is neil's home state, there's only one thing -- actually, two things that we're really sure about. there's going to be an election on november 4. and that if pat roberts wins he will sit with republicans. that's it for what we know. everything else, does orman win? yes or no. does he decide to sit with democrats and you look at him and say wow this guy looks sounds walks talks like a democrat mostly. i think that's probably where his heart is. but on the other hand he said things that would suggest that
5:44 am
he would do what's in the best interest of the state, which i think is code for if republicans are already a majority he's going to sit with them. or if he's the tie breaker. well, i think his heart is more democrat. but then he's a relatively young guy might want to run for reelection. so sit with republicans might be a better idea. so and all this is a backdrop of a civil war taking place underneath within the republican party that's causing sam brownback the governor to be five points behind in a state that's like genetically epublican. but let's just sort of say that roberts loses. so if republicans -- if begich land rue or prior survives, republicans need a purple or light blue state.
5:45 am
if roberts loses republicans need a purple or green state. if each happen democrats need to pick up two. so there are five we're looking at as possibilities in this purple swing or light blue. and the two that i think are absolutely closest, mark you'dle in colorado and bruce brailley in iowa. these races are effectively even. but if you had to say if one side or the other has momentum right now, just a little bit of momentum, who would you say? i would have to say republicans in both those cases. and that's not a prediction. but those two look pretty decent for republicans. on the other hand, north carolina with kay hagan, she's got sort of used the phrase i've used before, small but seemingly stable lead over tom till liss. and i think basically a legislature, and particularly a state senate that sort of went
5:46 am
a bridge too far off to the right, it's hurt the guy. it's hurt the speaker and might really cost him the election which would be otherwise a pretty winnable race. michigan, very, very close. here's stan. i've been -- you know. michigan very, very close. it would appear to me that gary peters the democrat has a very, very small but again stable lead, just a couple points, not much. and i would say organized labor is doing much more and more effectively in michigan. d not so in wisconsin in the governors race than we've seen in a long time but i would put a scale for the democrats. jean shaheen there's conflicting polls. most are showing shaheen ahead by half dozen points but we've seen some that had a tie so there may be some closure there. but i still think shaheen has a
5:47 am
measurable advantage. i kind of think she's -- so if republicans need one, it needs to be iowa or colorado. if they need two it's got to be both of those. but if -- you know, it's sort of if they just simply get republican states voting republican, they don't need to win any swing states or if they -- and if they lose both then they need to win two out of the purple or green categories. and i put it at 60%. my good friend and competitor stu rothenberg did something the other day and he's sticking with his prediction of 7 seats. he's doing a number. rsh one last thing. sometimes people have asked me, why the heck do we need to
5:48 am
listen to charlie cook or his team? nd why do we need to listen to them or stu and his terrific colleague? why should we listen to them if we've got nate silver and "new york times" and these other models out there? and my analogy is sort of the money ball analogy from the book that there's not a team in major league baseball that does not employ a team of stats stigs doing metrics. not one. they all see it's important. but there's not one team that fired all their scouts either. they found the optimal approach is look at the data, analyze the data, but also listen to the scouts, have them looking sitting in the bleachers with a speed gun which is kind of what we do and what our team does. in terms of interviewing candidates, watches the racing, sit in jennifer's office and she's watching ads hours on
5:49 am
end. and just sort of evaluating each of these from more of a subjective qual tative as opposed to quantitative. and i think there's value in all of those things. if i were going to look at two models most i would watch nate silver -- i have a lot of respect for nate. i think he's smart, has a neat statistical tool kith and is intellectually honest. so it's a different approach from what i take and i believe in my approach but i believe it's worth looking at. and the "new york times" does a good job. they had to scramble to put something together after nate left to go to espn but it's worth looking at. i'm not a huge fan of the post sergs of it and i'm not sure molecular mos are doing models. anyway, we're not going to get into that.
5:50 am
so that's sort of where i am on it and what i would like to do though is bring in two people that just go through just mountains and mountains of data and just have the experience and the intuition with stan greenberg. the work that stan's firm does and particularly with the democracy core where they're doing incredibly high quality both in terms of national surveys and surveys of competitive districts it's unlike anything else out there and just enormously invaluable. and neil is just one of the best around and his firm is half the poll which is my other favorite poll out there and their firms represent enormously high quality work. they're really bright people. they really are perceptive and just also very nice people and good friends. so i want to bring them up and then i'm going to listen very carefully and hopefully we could glean some things from
5:51 am
them. and i'm not going to put either one of them on the spot to throw any of their clients under a bus or tout shamelessly but just let them tell us what they think. so you guys want to come on up. [applause] >> all right. you want to catch your breath? >> i'll let neil go. >> ok. open up for a few minutes and then let stan. >> favored to win and projections at 7. >> so go race by race? >> yeah. >> let me kind of start with what some of what charlie talked about which is kind of the political environment. and charlie is exactly right.
5:52 am
the political environment is set by president obama's job approval rating. 40, 41, 42%. and the way i look at it, he's getting -- in his job approval, about 10-12 points lower than when he beat mitt. so you take that and apply it to these states these senate states that are red states that are up for grabs right now, and if the president won that with 50% of the vote then arguably he could be at 38% of job approval, which is an incredibly difficult climb for the democratic candidate. your home state louisiana, democrats feel the same way. i know. mary land rue is in deep trouble there. we have finished a poll there. what do you think obama's approval rating is among whites
5:53 am
in -- white voters in louisiana? >> i'm not sure but i suspect there's a 2 in front of it. >> no. >> there's a 1 in front of it. >> 15%. 15-80. it's like oh. i've been employed for a long time. we're looking at numbers we've never even seen before. there's -- you know, i mean, the mood of the country, along these kinds of figures. job approval in congress was 6% and the margin of error in the poll was 5. you know, it's like it could be a net negative. i talk about congress in terms of its -- the friends and family program because only friends and family approve of the job congress is doing. and just the environment itself, it is a strong anti-incumbent environment. voters -- which didn't get into in your discussion is the sense
5:54 am
that voters believe that washington has let them down. and that we can't fix this country until we fix washington, d.c., our politics and our politicians. that's one reason we've seen turnover election after turnover election. and there's just a frustration and anger, so that it used to be voters hated congress but love their congressman. now they hate congress and don't trust their congressman. there's a sense that the member of congress has to approve him or herself every year and there's just an anger with washington's inaction and dysfunction. so this is creating a political environment that's extraordinarily negative. actually toward both parties not just the party in power. but it's a negative and sour political environment. my second point is don't kid yourself into believing this is a national election. this is not a national election. this is a ten-state election
5:55 am
similar to the 2012 election to the presidential election where truthfully only eight states were competitive and this is the same model and this is what i think gives democrats a little bit of an advantage because they can focus their resources on these minimal number of states. to give an idea. the average voter in -- let's see. since labor day, iowa has been the most advertised state per capita in the country. there have been 147 ads per capita in iowa since labor day. on september 23, just take one day. september 23 in des moines there were 325 political ads in the senate race on tv one day. so first god bless you if you're in iowa or north carolina or michigan or colorado or kentucky and you're
5:56 am
being besieged with all these political advertising. i'm sure you can't wait for the election to be over. but it's not a national election. it's a stathe by state election. there's not really a national theme that's running through. it's obama approval rating underpin this thing and the frustration with d.c. but it is a state by state election and those personalities count. my third point is campaigns do matter. that's why i think anybody who is predicting they know republicans are going to win or democrats are going to win. guess what, campaigns make mistakes and over the last month we've seen it go from a republican advantage to democrats edging back to republicans having to win it back. they make mistakes. they focus on the wrong issues. and new information is introduced into these campaigns. so these campaigns do make a difference. so iowa and colorado and
5:57 am
kentucky and michigan, north carolina, all these states what happens over the next month is going to make a difference. he fourth point is which charlie didn't really raise is that terrific republican enthusiasm advantage. republican voters are significantly more enthusiastic, are pumped up for this election, and you're going to have to like hold them back from the poll ons election day. so republicans have a significant advantage intensity. we had that same advantage in 2012. one valuable lesson i learned was an unenthusiastic vote counts just as much as unenthusiastic vote.
5:58 am
when democrats are able because of the ground operation turn ut voters who are low protense propensity, their votes count ust as much as my republican 45 man in the suburbs who rushes to the poll ons election day. so all this you hear about the intensity advantage, i have a cautionary tale. i saw those numbers. and we don't have president romney now, unfortunately, we have president obama. so take that with a grain of salt. because on the ground does matter in these campaigns. my fifth point here is guys, we have a long ways to go. in political terms we are five weeks out four-1/2 weeks out from the election, that's several political lifetimes. a lot of stuff can happen. the senate is not yet decided. i think it may change a couple
5:59 am
times between now and election day. and don't take to heart all these, republicans have that enthusiasm advantage. if the democrats's ground game works well and they have a limited number of states to do it in, that enthusiasm advantage may be wiped away by the democrat turnout operation. so this is a dead heat. the toss-up. i agree with charlie's assessment of the states. the question is do we win any purple states? do we win iowa or colorado or both? can we? how close is north carolina going to be? all these states. i mean, it's a fascinating campaign. but we are long ways from determining the winner of the senate. and as you know, this is a smart audience, election night isn't going to determine the winner of the senate anyway because that's going to be in december in louisiana. so my final piece of advice if you have any extra capital buying a tv station in new
6:00 am
orleans would be a really good investment. and if you want to watch a lot f >> if you want to watch political ads visit new orleans day and the ion run-up election in december. political operative will be in town and every tv station ads because it could come down to the runoff election in louisiana. >> i was in baton rouge and new orleans this past weekend and an affiliate said they are seeing getting scaledng back because they are saving money for the runoff.
6:01 am
>> i apologize for creating suspense. ou should know this is the future because my schedule that palmer but my app sent me there and i was automatically programmed and when i walked in rsvp's went to create a senseto of interest in this election. > sorry to create the suspension. i asked for charlie cook. said hing that neil has about the convention wisdom
6:02 am
conventiony partisan like oh began talking my god i will have one more tell me how hey many white males vote for obama well republicans are doing with independents. won independents. that is part of the spin that it be possible that obama will win. neil is one of those people that change.es the i'm in the 50-50 probability down from -- you sound like you are in the 50-50 or you from 60-40 either way. > they don't let me get away with 50-50. i have to shade it one direction or the other. polsters are paid to go
6:03 am
50-50. setting a battleground release npr which we tomorrow so i won't indicate the results. a will also release on monday battleground poll and polls in battleground states for women's vote. that. will have we are also, as you know, both nvolved in actual races and actually independent efforts in many of the states and i will talk about the states. >> feel free. spend probably twice a day going through our polls and what r the trend is emerging. just stepping back, i think it hard to read what is happening from washington ecause the part you read from
6:04 am
washington is the obama part. you focus on the president, he the news and he's clearly the central dynamic. noting on the obama piece, -- i in the npr poll won't give the number but in the npr ous polls we did for 38%.approval was 37% to very low in these 12 states that the ll that constitute battleground. romney won these. territory. we will look at the results tomorrow. take theu look at just last 10 polls conducted, public look at ducted and obama's approval his approval 42% to 44% in the public polls. it has been stuck at 42 for a long time. on ink when we look back
6:05 am
this next week, we will look at hat happened with isis and syria and iraq and it might which the point at president edged up nationally. affects republican motivation, et cetera. let's go it the states. the other factor playing out is the ntense unpopularity of republican party. this is to not a vote party issue. we have the current polling in the battleground and there is no un populpopular as mcconnell. as harry ell known reed and i don't want to make comparisons that will cause for people i work with on the house side who get att k mcconnell -- >> can i mention her name? mcconnell has exceeded that in the senate battleground. washington and
6:06 am
gridlock and if you want to look what in a regression model would views of the define the icans republican party. say ve away from that and we don't have gridlock, the way he republican brand problem plays out is in the advertising and positioning of the candidates in the states. you don't see it because it is state.played out state by and there is a reason you went fairly tes being republicans moving more democratic is because they began candidates those with the party, with their priorities including a whole and of issues insensitivity to women and range of things that have become important in the state elections. there is a third piece in this recognize e come to
6:07 am
is increasingly important if you kansas and rstand north carolina. the republican governors and governing model of out of the 2010 election is intensely unpopular. at who has to look the lower ratings than louisiana jindal who is r lower than the president. tillis, the republican program in north happened nd what has with that association. states that have been brought are in play because of a local a state story, story, to the republican agenda nd brand which is making these races more competitive on the democratic side. in the found we have not found polling st poll we did
6:08 am
for a certain republican we difference on consolidati leadership and attention to vote among democratic and republican battleground states. they have been so bombarded with a ia they are kind of different place. election ando 2004 what happened in bush's shift ofon there was a around three points in his vote nationally. the battleground where it was fought out, no change, not a point of change from one election where you were intense ng in the campaign. e will see what the npr poll shows tomorrow but be alert to neil's point that the advantage and the watch the issues that have emerged. part of the republican brand with m is their problems
6:09 am
omen and they are a factor in how people are voting. then the last piece i will add affordable care act. presumption and strategy for republicans had pound that issue. i think as a swing punish get -- and to democrats. but increasingly as a motivator a reason for people to vote. ou should watch for the npr poll tomorrow on that issue. how we look back and we say come there was one phmore electn republicans were certain to take control and didn didn't? single biggest ad they have run has been on the affordable act. still a quarter.
6:10 am
it is the weakest thing they are using. using other things that are much stronger because i ideological s an determination to use the care,dable care act, obama as their issue. and you will see with the npr it a much more complicated. there is a percentage who are gainst it because it is big government but it is not big enough to decide an election. praorts is what they choose to run on and there s evidence that they are shifting in the states. means i really don't know. am close to still 50-50. a trend either way. these things i just described going into the
6:11 am
equation in a lot of the states. i don't see any evidence of it breaking one way or the other. >> let me ask neil a question on ffordable care and then let's open it up. senate top republican strategist suggest six months they started telling their clients you need to move way from the affordable care a act, we have milked that cow for it's got. and you can't be a one-trick pony, start to diversify and places messaging other because there are no more points to be scored on the affordable care act. does that reflect what you have data?n your >> if you look at approval rating of the affordable care and compare in the same
6:12 am
survey to the approval rating of identical.r obama care is obama and obama is obama care. the same.ne and the obama care issue is one that i think it is pretty much baked this.t stan is sharp on it is a motivation issue to this election hy is important and why they need to vote. a base issue than necessarily a persuasion issue. it is a stimulation issue. i think you will see some hey igns go back to say everything you didn't like about it this person voted for it to little ack in the mix a bit. because obama care is shorthand government, bureaucracy, tie it to the sense that policeman who have ost their health insurance or
6:13 am
the ability to see their doctors were able to keep their plans. that and remind people. but it is not aback the only issue. campaigns, what we try to do is interject new in the mix. you want to tell people something knew they didn't already know. repeat the same stuff over and over, they are not into it. need to hear new information and they want -- they are still trying to figure their decisions and i think ou will find some campaigns trending to new issues the last weeks of the campaign. said there were other issues that are more owerful that republicans could be using. just, what do you think? >> stan made the comment. hear from him.
6:14 am
giving you -- >> you have been beating on my curious. i was >> i'm going to pass on that one, charlie. well when they talk about spending. >> ok. more government co-- more forthcoming than i expected. here are some microphones around the room, one over here and one over here. relevant david cook aid wave your hands in a nonthreatening fashion and we will have a microphone come to you. right over here. >> thank you. arkansas, u have louisiana, alaska as tossups. discussed them you seemed to indicate you thought the republicans were more likely to three.o of
6:15 am
if you take the 10 tossups and astribute them 50-50 you have three-seat democratic advantage. does ey tossups and what stan think about this? >> some of this is semantics and approach "new york times" ao periodically is running what each of the model are doing and we are saying and what lay out.ato and others carry notice, we tend to more tossups than anybody else. don't have a -- or we our feel team -- do not have a really kind of eling that we know who is going to win. know is a lead we think we who is going to win. if it is a toss, there is a sufficient element of doubt that we are not going to put our reputations on the line. umpire.rt of like an
6:16 am
our strike zone is a hrelittle the other some of folks. our definition. states.those three >> i would say if democrats only lost one which i think is highly unlikely that can be arkansas. only lost two i would throw in probably louisiana. and if one survives i think it likely to be alaska. but i think more likely -- i think it is more likely that all three go down by far and away more nly one and probably three than two. in my calculation though i'm pat of assuming that roberts comes up short. kind be surprised but i of think so. so, in my mind republicans need six., not
6:17 am
-- unch is going to be iowa i would know two races rather know iowa and colorado. an answer to ng that question. i would recommend you bring a cultural and historical it.nd blend to his country is not only gridlocked in washington, we are olarized and not just polarization, we have some egions that are moving more republican, more hostile. opposite ing in the direction and they are very different trends. i n i look at these races look at the south and i -- specific races, the trends of the south are dramatic.
6:18 am
if you look at these states they worse.come out a little landreaux that mary works out some magic in parts of louisiana. ut the south is always disappointing. north carolina is -- we know more entially it is partisan and a new greg post-graduates and diverse immigrant population trend there is important. throw itf alaska, even is a democrat holding it, it is montana mode an, that does quirky things. it is a function of how that kind of candidate wins. everybody knows,
6:19 am
here is a lot more in alaska and there was a reality show it was the saying taking some alaskan women and florida that were single and kind of an interesting premise. the line was for women in alaska the odds are good butted odd. are i always kind of loved that. i don't know how i follow that comment. you look at those states, i think it is likely all three may go our way. but i want to make it point. reiterate what charlie opened this session in and historical in
6:20 am
perspective. if republicans fail to win majority and i think it will be you know, you know where i stand on that. it look at go back nevada, and indiana and missouri. is not necessarily a failure of republicans to win or seven andng six beating an incumbent is tough. tough.damn and i think that you look at our ailure in previous elections that failed to set us up to win or four seats instead of six or seven. i think we fixed some of those problems in terms of we don't and some of these wild crazy nominees we had in the past and i think -- exotic. >> exotic, yes. think we are in pretty good shape but it is obstetrical
6:21 am
tight. the probl 't fixed problem. tillis represents the core of republican party. he was the preferred candidate. having are you are with the people that represent party.e of the funding campaigns and candidates matter. that is why i don't think -- if he election occurred today one outcome would take place but it is 33 days from now. long way to go. campaigns make a lot of mistakes in 30 days. amplify neil's other point on i will put my colleague the spot, in the last 10 years ive elections democrats have
6:22 am
unseated 11 republican senate -- you are saying 12 republican senate incalm republicans have .nseated three so, for some reason there's been last esistance in the decade or inability for republicans to knock off incumbent even in 2010 it was a great year for republicans. overcome that o to get the majority. question?he next mic, and are you next to somebody with a question? a tactical question. a lot of money is sunk into advertising and my impression is that is going to he near dead rather than the living because most -- my watch n really don't
6:23 am
television commercials. yet it is almost like we are world war ii with a strong cavalry. thoughts on the effectiveness of television advertising and who is it which voters is it reaching and what is it achieving? motivational or trying to if te noise >> your point is exactly what we have seen in the data. a national survey with and we found fewer voters say erican tvy get their news from live every day. that they watch live tv every day. and from 18 to 44-year-olds just live tvd say they watch every day. you have to be kidding. difficult.ordinarily
6:24 am
f two-third of americans have smart phones, including the blackberries which i don't smart phone. >> but it has a better key board. yes. communicate with voters is strortdly difficult and right now you have a ton of money on tv advertising that is hitting people who have already that is why all of spending much re more money on digital and trying to reach out and doing target communications, personal communications with voters so that what you are seeing is -- knows they are hitting the of it but what you are not of money the amount going to digital and individual and ct and even mail personal contact. so you are not seeing how the spent but that doesn't
6:25 am
mean you leave tv uncovered. illustrate your point i like to use an example. was 26ghter, who in 2012 living in cleveland, ohio. did not -- their tv set was not wired to cable, it didn't rabbit ears and she watched apple tv which i don't know what that is and listen to enerally her ipod or iphone music or npr to and from work. so, reaching her -- she was not reaching her but would have been a challenge for a campaign. that is exactly what neil is saying. >> let me speak both sides of this. we still have the election. we still have campaigns this where advertising can
6:26 am
way.t a race in a major look at pennsylvania and the governor's race and what happened there. watching tv, so by the e still impacted tv. p.a.c.'s after super became legalized by the court i in the last cycle watching surprise million dollar coming from outside and impacting the races. much less of an issue. .eople know it is coming has fore the fund-raising balanced it and you know it is also think you have reached not so much a lack of penetration in the market, the market in which people roll their eyes on ads.
6:27 am
they are getting hurt on negative ads right now. i don't think any of these will shifted by a killer sudden ad is locked in t in a lot ofhave tan advertise -- have taken in a lot of advertising. who has a question with a microphone? over the last month there ave been significant shifts in iowa and colorado. can you discuss why there have there?ifts and obviously candidates do matter, and is that what is in those two states? thank you. iowa first. i think a very competitive race. the democrats did a nice job of to define the
6:28 am
republican but i think what has is brailey failed to define himself and give a reason to vote for him. it was all about joining us -- did some focus groups among wal-mart moms which is a and we did oneup of these groups in des moines. knew a lot about. define himselfto and once republican money caught up with the democratic money and focus on his record, it him.ht up to o, i think voters accepted her for who she was and she focused on who bruce is and i think numbers have changed. a t is one, iowa, but still
6:29 am
tight race. colorado? against coryttacks gardner as been an extreme candidate tea party have fallen a little short and that true, ung all and it is combined with the i whelm overwhelming focus by the udall abortion and i think kwraou a sense that ca running a single focus campaign and i think they too would guess they went far and there was a backlash, ot just among women voters but among men. we are seeing that in the denver suburbs. so you are seeing some shifts there. state.o is still a tough
6:30 am
we did pollsor colorado and eye in the presidential and they fell flat. presidentialin the campaign we thought of iowa as a the greatest sense of kind of, you know, 2008 remorse after the election, between 2008 and 2012. are voters in iowa who believe they put obama into and there is more -- betrayalnt, more strong but he was not what they expected. i think that is why the became so much time in owa in september of 2012 and they ended up beating us pretty well but you have that sense in hat state and i think that is part of what may be getting more that campaign.
6:31 am
>> there's somebody over here. do you have a mic? get mics to hands. here is within land there and -- one hand there and one hand here. >> i have two questions. georgia, is about about their district and i was think -- how do you what do you think is the -- looking how is the race for the incumbent john farrow a lot of are candidates that go out actively seeking women's votes but what vote and male particularly younger votes? you have a unique feeling on barrow? >> no. i wish david from our house were here. but i will jump in. he's got a to --
6:32 am
decent eventually in a district that is just absolutely ugly. a democrat, really, really ugly. you just sort of sometimes see are survivors and but you know when there person boom, that seat is gone. again, gone, gone. and everybody e, up here has seen candidates that in really o survive tough races then there was a year and the trap door opens and they are gone. survive.k barrow will was yre in north carolina able to survive a long time and then decided to pull the plug. i remember the district has a voting index that is seven or ight points more republican than the rest of the country. has a bond, a
6:33 am
connection, and so far this year working. like he's so, if you told me that emocrats were going to lose 10 seats nationwide, i don't think there.'s with be in now, if this thing got into the house -- the difference between and senate there are technical reasons the louse won't shift much and technical senate will be, osh, the best case for democrats no matter what would be losing four seats and five, likely, and more eight is less likely and that is the bell curve. but in the house there are forth that many vulnerable democratic left. when you lose 63 seats in one election and get eight back the you are already the ow to mid hanging fruit for republicans is already picked and it is sort of a mop-up operation after florida i think barrow is going to be ok.
6:34 am
-- and ou saw early on georgia is not one of the first, if you saw barrow going down democrats may be having an even night tan -- than we thought. but my guess is he will survive and i say that despite the fact pretty environment is tough for democrats this year. west rlie, what about virginia, three? >> i wouldn't necessarily say that. to ink -- stan alluded to dor if you were going a profile of where in the last democratic, has the democratic party struggled borders i would say south, small town, rural, lots
6:35 am
f disproportionate number of older white voters and a state th with a heavy fossil fu fuel. kentucky, rginia, hat is sort of where it all comes together. and i think ray has a good but if he can survive be kind of pretty sortising because he's got of all -- it is like all the attack tors for a heart -- i shouldn't use that metaphor that is a lot tougher. your question about men, there is a lot of focus on the and problems
6:36 am
republicans have with women. the flip side of that is obvious the democrats have a huge and theamong men voters gender gap cuts both ways and nowsee that all over states where republicans are doing much we' amend not women and you are seeing it in the ratings of the president and across the board. e have seen that since the ronald reagan election in 1980 and it expands and contracts but a significant gap. we need to do better among women oters no question but the democrats have significant challenges among males. at all with agree neil but there is one partially mitigating factor and this is great in equiequitities. men so ve longer than 47% r 53% went female and
6:37 am
male so -- >> that comes out of balance a little bit. >> but with everything neil said was right. the filter for this ought to what is happening in the republican conservative places you all the talked about, deep south, border tates and more rural and evangelical. ing heavily l trend ing for democrats but you look at collecollege and white oncollege men there's been no trend against democrats outside of the republican party. gender e we are on the thing and i'm not going to put even of you on the spot throw i suspect you both have done some work in louisiana cycle. but there was a cnn poll a showed f weeks ago that
6:38 am
effect in the mary landreaux and bill cassidy race that showed effectively no gender gap whatsoever. not seen cross tabs and any other surveys in the state, was don't know whether that an anomaly in that poll or there as a pattern and some reason why she was not doing a lot better among women than men. that is an anomaly. >> ok. warning.is a good take every poll you look at with a grain of salt. start looking in terms f end voters or women or white women or african-american or hispanics the margin of error of can vary dramatically and how the sampling is done can vary. if something doesn't seem right it is probably not right. it is probably wrong. think it can't be true.
6:39 am
have redone, i think, a handful of polls the last few weeks because i didn't believe the data. it is like if i can't explain it if there's not a rational explanation i have to redo it. what is happening here. change for nobers apparent reason it is probably not right. hope there are no couple show bookers watching this that hen there is a poll that shows something different from every other poll rather considering it , as neil says the odds wrong.is probably just so putting a huge spotlight on you are probably doing your viewers a disservice. >> that's right. -- we should note there is a difference between campaign all the polls that are
6:40 am
done publicly and for the newspapers. voter pollsolls are sampling people we know voted in 2010 or 2006. with likely g voters and that is true of every campaign in the states. means the campaigns are dealing i think with polls that and not more real subject to these. throw one thing out and if either of you wants to this d but you can't say yourself because it would sound elf-serving, one of the things you hear in the poll aggregators is that independent polls are ore reliable than polls by partisan organizations. the idea is that the partisan are somehow ls
6:41 am
really biased as if a campaign of moneynd a whole lot on getting numbers that were wrong would be a good idea. and i think what a lot of people if stan does a lousy numbers y for a democrat, the odds that hear thoser going to numbers are almost unanimous existent. .he same for neil >> if we have lousy numbers for democrats we would release them. >> yes. being made ent is in a free-standing poll state that you would do, not a that you but something would have tkodone pick one in it week or two what would cost? >> i will let you price it.
6:42 am
$28,000 or more. to you that there are no newspapers in america, no radio stations and none of the - that are releasing numbers from a survey with a fair market value of $28,000. be probably closer to $3,000. is sort of a mythology hat has built up that the academics kind of dwell on. >> i think you are right. take it as aght to fact in the modeling. democracy corps which is the most accurate of the , we reeast every advance we announce in we are releasing it so away don't have the option of getting we don't like. you discuss a
6:43 am
blanket policy. speak in iowa. i trust that one. even.s it i think he is right about that being very close. the pollson't release and there is random variation, other states probably have where the democrat very well so you have to be careful saying there bias.house effect or >> we have done 1,400 polls this year, 1,400. we have released 20 maybe. >> your party is having a good year. of surveys. a ton we don't want to release this stuff. we are graded by 538 and we pluses.
6:44 am
it is based on like 20 polls, keuidding me. but take it with a grain of salt. campaign released i a, 1,800 survey done over think eight days in the field starting on friday night and on saturday. they did y of that is racking 1,800 in nine days and cherry picked those days because they were the days that showed grimes up by two points. did it a day later or day earlier the numbers were down. cherry pick -- take it with a grain of salt. but really fically good. take that with a grain of salt. the you look at some of
6:45 am
polls they go to likely voter and the fter labor day numbers get crazy it is because they are not doing it right. it is flawed. it is just flawed. where are the mics? to jeff.ver he gave me a plug with my 30 years ago that i'm all.biased at >> you never have been. question.nt and then a the comment is about georgia. neil said it pl might not be settled into december. it could go to january? provisions the runoff in georgia that takes it to 6.nuary 5 or for ber 4, december 6
6:46 am
louisiana, i'm certain louisiana go runoff. it can be georgia as well. do if orman is kansas.in he doesn't foe which way to go nd until he tkaoeudz he can't get any committee assignments. >> that was not my question. >> no, about you it was interesting. >> if i listen to everything has been said this is not going to be a wave election. very, very close. and if we look forward to 2016 take away right now since s of strategizing it is not a wave, where do the two years e next given the presidential will charlotte shortly after there -- shortly after there looks ends. >> it is not a wave election for
6:47 am
congress and senate but one thing i would advise you to look t is state legislatures across the country, republicans will make significant gains. it will be a ave wave that is on the ground and campaigns, not on the federal level. what does it mean for 2016? not publicans we have address d the issues that cost in 2012.ection the great just like success we had in 2010 didn't mean squat for 2012. we didn't take that and run with t in the 2012 election, and it was -- that was a challenge for us and i don't think we as epublicans have addressed that challenge going forward to 2016. we face significant obstacles the 2016 presidential election. > regardless of whether it is
6:48 am
hillary or elizabeth warner or anybody else. > on the senate a lot of the factors that are working against democrats that i talked about and work flip over against republicans. there are 24 republican seats up 2016. there are only 10 democratic seats up. and e been saying six counted it is seven. seven of the republican seats and no n obama states emocratic states are up in romney states. second, because as neil alluded, is a presidential election so instead of midterm where there thumb on the scale for republicans, it is not on there for republicans. republicans really, really, eally need to not only win a majority this time but if they can put an extra seat or two on they might find hat hadn'ty if they have --
6:49 am
handy if they have as ugly a isr in 2016 in the senate as possible. but the nightmare scenario for this.icans is their party was so, so pumped up optimistic about 2012, both in terms of the presidential ace and winning a majority of the senate. so they were bitterly disappointed. out of it wondering was our t lied to or money not well spent. i'm talking about macro, top to bottom. as a result, there hasn't been goi -- money moan going into republican committees super p.a.c.'s because the on r community is so down the republican side. we had a strategist who said if it were not the koch brothers we blown away financially.
6:50 am
they are keeping republicans in the game. let's say if republicans only seats or five 49-50, r so they are at ith all of these amazing factors working in republicans' favor, if they don't get a donors are going to be absolutely in a state of enormous depression. will make it harder to raise money in 2016. 2016 they are going into 50 where they ould loose ump teen seats that is how democrats could be at 59 2010, where they were in they won't be there but 53 or 54. that would be the worst case for republicans. huge, which is why
6:51 am
all of you as soon as the election is over take a relax but this next one, stay tuned. implications for the special, as kneel indicated -- indicated republicans have a base strategy. they believe if they win this it their base has turned out in bigger numbers and excited about issues and running on affordable care act. hey have taken irretrievable positions on immigration going into this off-year election. moved for the appealing of the executive order dreamers. all of the candidates are lined up against that. of this election with that being a defining so if ou are a republican on where you stand on immigration for the hispanic, greg hispanic been dreamers, is the
6:52 am
most important powerful symbol understand us. i polled for the "l.a. times" there is nothing more mportant than dreamers for the hispanic kaoupbt. the republican party has been a this.ime coming back >> last question to jeff. i was glad to endorse your use letter back in the -- your newsletter. i will give you my address because the commission check got lost in the mail. a polling question we are unland linesgiving and moving to cell phones. an you talk how you figure out to make sure you get a good demographic cut. think the land lined are holder and males. how do you figure it out?
6:53 am
how do you get to the cell phone group? does 50% ocracy corps cell phones and rising. but it cost them a national poll $10,000 more just the dealing with the cell phone portion. in a bigger sense there is a but it has saved polling. i taught we would be gone by now. thaought they were so under of the country ut what has happened is increasingly you can get cell phones, they do cost less, increasingly using the number on their voter file you can get to people with cell phones but that peopleou can reach young
6:54 am
and minority people who are particularly lie with cell phones. do ought people would not long surveys on cell phones and i was wrong. rate is no greater than land lines. saved hink it has polling. i think we are still here we made ting because that transition. nobody 10 years ago gave out their cell phone number. are you kidding me? no. it is just automatic. of course you give out the cell phone number. hat is where you can be reached. i can't remember the last time the phone rang at home with a call.rm phone it is what stan said. weyears ago we never dreamed would be making a living calling people on a cell phone but that at least 30% of every survey is by cell you need it make sure we have enough younger voters. we make sure s so
6:55 am
we have younger voters in the samples. extensive and more difficult and time-consuming. i first started this away did volunteer survey esearch in the late 1970's and i ran tease phone banks and we banks and for every interview we pulled five telephone numbers. is probably up it 150 numbers now for every interview you want complete. it is extraordinary. much.is why it costs so that is why the media outlets are unwilling to spend the money they should be spending to do it right. there is also you can do polling by internet but the stuff stan and i do we are testing messages testing tough messages pro and against candidates and that that people if we test over the internet people take screen shots of that. ou don't want your messages on
6:56 am
the front page of the louisvi e "louisville courier-journal" or kansas city star. you c you cannot afford that so that temperaturelephones. >> the question i'm going to pretend that the c-span camera is not there. you had to give some advice 2016-2017, y in the -2018, if you had to give candid advice to your party on what ought to be thinking about and what direction they need to , where would you go to that candidate advice your party? and forget the cameras. know it is tough but i think a seasoned woman is reallyal candidate the raoeight thing.
6:57 am
>> mid to late 60's. is tough medicine. >> maybe your grandmother. is that your wife you are talking about? is on the gh advice economy. the president spoke at the america tions on where stand, he is speaking on the economy. fundament omy has fundamentally change and people know it. mature not been a discussion from democratic eaders about this economy and what you have to do to rate middle class incomes and that start.o >> i think i read that in a book that you f years ago and somebody else wrote it was insightful. >> neil, your private advice. as you raised earlier we have
6:58 am
to mographic issue we need address in the post-obama era mong african-americans and latinos. that we are ress going to have a tough time winning the presidency. >> well, i've treasured my relationship with national 1998 and it has collaboration the with united technologies are i aspire to have an elevator in my house and helicopter in my back yard. when you are affordable we will get there. i'm teasing. all.k you this is great. we had a standing room only for and thank you all coming. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> next live your calls and comments on washington journal jerry ws makers with
6:59 am
moran, national republican senatorial committee chair. national , republican committee chair discusses national strategy for the elections. >> c-span's 2015 student cam competition is under way. this is for middle and high school student to award 150 $100,000.taling create a five to seven minute documentary on the topic the branches and you.
7:00 am
host: good morning. the presidents we will begin tomorrow to talk about the situation in africa. here in the u.s., on wednesday the president travels to the pentagon to meet with military officials and military brass on isis. and he is on the road again with a number of fundraisers in california. the sunday, the front pages and editorials, questions on the response to the ebola virus by the federal government

20 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on